"You wouldn't be the first person to tell me to do research that leads nowhere. I'll pass. Thanks."
Nothing's wrong with me. I'm perfectly happy to use debate to inform others and myself, what i'm not happy to do is to participate in a debate where the opposing party refuses to do any research.
Essentially that would not become a debate, that would become a tutoring session, which unfortunately I don't have the incentive to participate in.
Do you understand the difference?
A) When you say that evolution has played a "non-role" in human's biological adaption to gaining fat, I would completely disagree. In fact it is almost common knowledge, that when people enter extreme diets depriving themselves from enough food, the body will react and set off physiological markers which will indeed entice the body to store more fat. This is why many people who undergo extreme diets end up whipping back and not only gaining their fat but normally more which can bring them unfortunately to turn obese. Furthermore it is evolutionary a good trait for humans to have this trait because it's what has allowed us to store reserves of energy in cases of long food deprivation periods as was more common before. On the other hand I would agree with your statement that the current obestiy epidemic that has swept the globe due to dietary flaws and genetically modified foods have no doubt lead to this imbalance in those who abuse this system and end up turning obese.
However, although that is true, it is completely beside the point of this debate. In the same way you amended you challenge to ensure I did not mistake "thin" with "anorexic" respectably so, I have already established more than enough times (And with links to reputable sources) that in fact "Fat" and "obese" are also no the same thing. Furthermore being "fit" and being "fat" are not non-excludable. Therefore your arguments are just repeating what you said before without listening to the opposing argument, and arguing against those. Therefore I see not the point of all of those points you made, which are interesting and correct information about contemporary obesity and our distribution of calories. Unfortunately since they are beside the debate, they don't really have any argumentative value and end up just being decorum which diverts the readers from really seeing that you aren't really arguing anything with those points logically.
B) Once more I agree with you that sedentary livelihood is detrimental for health and that we have not evolved to be so immobile. Yet once again, I've already discussed how many fat people are in fact quite active, and that being "fit" and "Fat" is not mutually exclusive. Furthermore I would like to point out that there are lots of people that have faster metabolisms or simply thinner bodies and yet lead very sedentary lives. So being sedentary is in no way restricted to being fat. Therefor this point really does't argue against how being fat is bad. I would like to point out you are arguing many "health" and "behavioural" points from the misconception that being fat comes in hand with being those other terms such as "lazy" or "slothful". Once again you are using circular arguments which is a logical fallacy. Just because some lazy people are fat does not mean that all fat people are lazy. That's not how it works, especially since there are lazy and slothful people across the entire BMI spectrum.
C) Thirdly, I have already proven (even with articles) that one can be fit and fat at the same time. Therefore I don't really need to find articles that show that being fat is better than being fit, because that is a question which is flawed since it does not understand that the two are not in fact mutually exclusive. Furthermore this is a debate, not a game to see who wins, but an attempt of both of us to reason concretly until we reach a purer truth. The question of this debate isn't "Is being fat better than being thin and fit", the question of this debate is "Is being fat good for a person" to which one must asses many paradigms, not only physical health. Since we have already demonstrated that health issues are negligble if not indifferent to being fat under the right conditions, then one can show that being fat is not bad for health. And since being fat is not inherently bad for health, but yet it comes with perks such as longer survival rates in emergency cases, more body heat, and many more aforementioned physical pluses, one can see that being fat poses many benefits on the physical front.
D) I would also like to remind you of the other points that are being made, because whilst you are strongly attempting to ascertain that being fat is bad for ones health, which we are already establishing its statistically not true, then perhaps you should try to diversify your arguments and come up with more.
I believe I have successfully disemboweled your that. ;)
PS: when you attacked my arguments and said they were "empty and misinformed purple prose" you didn't really quote any specific examples and showed how they were misinformed. So once again, throwing random attacks, especially if they are A) uncalled for and B) not even backed up, is only going to make you look bad. Don't try harder, try smarter.
PPS: Yes I'm new to this cite, and in time I don't believe I will learn you are "pretty much the science subjects hority" firstly because you don't even know how to spell authority, which is ironic because you are trying to use appeal to authority to put yourself into a position of higher standing (failing so). But furthermore your arguments and citings aren't really sophisticated and one could easily google them up, so I'm not really impressed as of now.
Man I'm not going to debate against someone who is uninformed.
The reasoon users cant use that password recovery system is because the lock screen of the iphone does not have that possibility. In addition if someone tries to guess the password enough times, then the phone will automatically all of its data.
While I agree with all your points, I would like to point out to further strengthen your case that prostitution is not a labor that employs solely female workers. In fact there is still a considerable percentage of the prostitution industry which employs male workers from positions in infrastructure to positions as prostitutes themselves.
Cartman I swear I'm not trolling you here, this is a real issue, I don't see what you don't get...
Please read the articles and do outside research until you come to understand what this is all about. I could answer your questions one by one, but I'm busy with stuff too, and it would be faster for you to google any queries you have.
But trust me it makes absolute sense, and it's very important. It's Apple vs the FBI which by extension is the government. This is a very big case.
"FBI Director James Comey defended the agency’s legal pursuit of access to suspects’ digital information, including that of an iPhone owned by one of the San Bernardino terrorists"
Although Apple claims that the FBI's request to unlock this specific iPhone could lead to a slippery slope to unlock many more or "all" as you put it. The FBI court case we are focusing on is in fact on this one, where the FBI is asking Apple to unlock this single iPhone.
Please read this article to get yourself up to speed:
http://variety.com/2016/biz/news/
Now that you are up to speed, what are your arguments? I'll be excited to debate them, unless you convince me absolutely ;)
Before I begin to disembowel your counter arguments, which I must say have progressed in sophistication, but ultimately fall flat, I would like to address some of your foul play so as to ensure fellow debaters aren't mislead by them.
First of all I'm not technically overweight. To be overweight you need to have a BMI in between 24 and 29, and last time I checked I had a BMI of 23. Instead of trying to look to undermine your opposition by using Ad Hominem look for more solid grounding upon which to debate.
Secondly, you don't need to flaunt that you are a post-grad in biology with a specialization in Evolution, and warn me to be careful about it, especially if you are not going to make a point about it. Once again you are trying to appeal to authority to mislead our fellow debating partners, not to mention that it's completely irrelevant to the argument. Imagine if we were debating about another subject such as which candidate was going to win the elections this during this run, and you suddenly come up to say that I should be careful with my moves because you have a driving license which I don't. I would agree that you are more specialised in driving vehicles yes, but it would be completely irrelevant. So please, stick to the debate.
Now to your points...
A) While having a bmi 10-13% is agreed to be the optimal fat percentage, many people who are not athletes, can still be fit and fat at the same time. One does not exclude the other. And in fact people who are overweight and can be seen as fat, although some studies show that there is a negligible increase in some risk factors, its also been widely shown that with exercise, one can still be fat and still be as healthy as someone with 10-13% fat as you said. Btw someone who is fat would fall under the 25-29 bmi, and not above at which point it would be considered Obese. Furthermore the reason why being fat and exercising and staying healthy are not incompatible, is because many studies have shown that what one eats can have a greater impact on ones loss of weight, than how much one exercises, therefore one can be fat and still exercise and be perfectly healthy.
For a more detailed explanation on how we shouldn't judge by how we look, but about different internal factors check out this article from a medically acredited online database supervised by PhDs in the field:
http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/
B) Attacking an argument by calling it names is the best way to demonstrate to show that you are terribly desperate to weaken it, it does not however actually weaken it... it only makes you look bad. But I digress... My second rebuttal is that you state that my emotionally happy argument is flawed because fat people tend to suffer more from depression and anxiety. The problem with this argument is that you are suggesting being fat leads to these states of mind, when in fact being fat can be not only genetically predisposed but furthermore, it being fat could come as a cause of those very mental states you mentioned. People who suffer from depression experience different hormonal levels which causes them very often to be lethargic, so naturally depressed people are likelier to be fat or even obese. You've got the order of causality wrong. Although I'm sure there are some cases were being fat can lead to low self esteem, it is far less likelier to lead to depression (as that is a physiological illness that is controlled by the person). Even if some people have low self-esteem because they are fat, with proper education they would be able to see that what matters is character and the intangibles, not the body they drive in. In fact if that were to be the case the majority of people above certain age levels were gaining fat is almost inevitable would be clinically depressed, suffer from anxiety and have low self esteems, but that simply is not the case.
C) Just because you are fat does not mean you have trouble breathing. In fact it's normally the other way around, if you have trouble breathing because you are asthmatic lets say, you are more likely to move less because you get tired physically easier due to the lower levels of oxygen that reach the muscles. Therefore the lower levels of inactivity will naturally lead to gaining weight for most of these people, but please stop using circular logical fallacy to argue your points.
D) Finally the last point I'd like to make is that I agree with your proposition that "exercise improves ALL things!", but the problem is that it's quite irrelevant to the debate, seeing as I've already proven how being fat and exercising are not mutually exclusive. So once again, read what has been written, and respond accordingly.
There. Are. Advantages. To. Being. Fat. Period.
Actually "listen and learn" as you put it.
Hope this helps. ;)
Please Cartman, ignore this guy, it's been too long now, and everyone else has left this debate, I'm asking you for your sanity and health, because I care about my allies.
Don't listen or respond to this troll anymore (on this debate).
Let's move on
Therefore have you switched sides on this debate? Or have you found any other potential weaknesses in my side of the argument (aside of physical health).
Thank you for agreeing with my point then, I do not see how it refutes it though. I've managed to convince you on this front i suppose.
After reading your article I come to understand that your slight confusion, as is normal. There is a distinction between being fat and being obese. When you are obese you have enough additional fat to cause health problems, many of which you listed. In fact the website refers to obese people, not fat people, therefore many of these points do not apply to the fat people we are debating over.
The following quote from the article you linked to brings up the flawed counterargument that I've tried to argue against: "Obese or overweight people are looked down upon. It's easy to feel bad about one's self". After reading this one might think that since one is overweight or fat, they should be scared of societal peer pressure, and that we should change for society, but in fact I would argue this is flawed because the problem isn't being overweight. According to this line, the real problem is how certain people "look down" on the overweight. This of course means that if you are fat you should ignore them, and that we should try to educate people in respect and acceptance of others, furthermore we should educate people in believing in themselves no matter what they look like, if they are ugly, or fat or whatever. Of course if they are obese they should lose weight, because obesity is when you are too fat, but when you are just fat that should be completely acceptable.
The other argument that the link you sent made was that being fat could result in a lack of energy and in turn in a more sedentary life, which I agree sedentary lives can be bad for health. However, the problem with this argument, is that it assumes people that are fat will be more sedentary because they have less energy because everything is harder to do. In fact if anything, many fat people do exercise a lot, and although this may sound counter intuitive, many studies have shown that in attempting to lose weight, what you eat has a much larger influence on weight loss than how much you exercise.
So indeed, people may exercise a lot and be healthy and yet be fat. One does not exclude the other.
Good attempts, but as I said before in my paragraphs, your arguments rely on misconception and a lack of distinction between obesity and being fat.
I'm very glad your response is as meaty as it is. Because in fact, most of the argument I've found online or articles are for apple, but I wanted to challenge myself and fight for the underdog of this debate (publicly for now).
I do also see that a transparency imbalance in-between the government and the people to be a very terrible and Orwellian future... On the other hand I still stand that although in the short run many people could be embarrassed to have this sort of transparency or scared, it would be beneficial as like you said transparency has always been good. The issue would now be on how to ensure that this is a fair exchange and that if apple gives in, so does FBI on some fronts.
And in fact as the decades pass we are seeing a more and more transparent future, and I believe if we continue at this rate it is possible we will enter a new future where transparency becomes more ubiquitous.
Thank you for the heads up Sparticus! I was beginning to sense that. Although I must say the most pathetic attempt was done by SlapShot in the "Is being fat good" debate, check it out and my response for a few laughs if you want.
Onwards with debate! :D
Hellno, I wasn't trying to get a point, I was trying to clarify... Just saying'.
If you'd like to argue that, do so with arguments, reasoning and examples, don't just state your view without backing it up.
I'm excited to hear your rebuttals and hope to see the level of this debate rise to new intellectual heights :)
Please check my points beforehand, so that you can respond properly (unlike Slapshot below, hahaha)
Everyone always values transparency. Anytime a party keeps a secret from another it is because it holds something that my harm the other party, otherwise, it would be perfectly okay to have it public.
In the long run if we all agree on transparency, the world will be a better place because everyone would post things knowing the consequences of it, and people would be more careful and respectful with what they post.
Therefore although many people would back up Apple due to privacy concerns, since in the long run everything is going to be transparent for the greater good, we might as well get the ball rolling as soon as possible.
"We need a black market in order for the government to be able to pay it's taxes"...
What the heck is this supposed to mean? It makes no utter sense. Do you even understand the terms you are using?
Can you clarify what you tried to say here it isn't clear semantically speaking.
A) please try to make your responses more clear, your grammar is confusing me.
B) What links are you referring to?
Could you clarify what you were trying to say so I can respond appropriately?
I believe that many people do indeed marry fat people. In fact that simply is statistically the case. When you say "nobody wants to marry somebody who is fat", I would argue this statement is flawed due to its generalisation and lack of basis. Are you implying that you wouldn't marry someone who is fat?
And yes, if I loved the person for who they were and their accomplishments, their BMI would not play a role in my decision to marry them.
On your second point, I would argue that if your girlfriend or spouse wants you to lose weight that that is a perfectly normal desire, but like with most things about yourself from your dreams, personality, to habits, one shouldn't simply change who they are simply because someone else asks them too. In fact If your partner insists and/or emotionally black mails you into losing weight, that that in fact would be a good sign that they are a toxic person to be with. So in the end, you would be able to clearly assess that they don't love you for who you are. So yes, if my partner wanted me to lose weight, and after I explained to her I was healthy and happy with how I was (as I was not obese), and even after that she insisted and threatened to leave or any other sort of blackmail, I would indeed suggest one ends that relationship.
Blizzardbird,
When you respond can you please not copy paste the entire thing you are responding too, it's not necessary and we'd all understand you are responding to that if you "dispute" it.
Furthermore I don't see how your point attempts to dispute what you "disputed". Could you clarify what you were trying to say, or did you hit "dispute" instead of "support" by accident?
